But all jokes aside, wasnt one of the issues with her was she wasnt qualified for the job he hired her to do?
But all jokes aside, wasnt one of the issues with her was she wasnt qualified for the job he hired her to do?
I believe this was her second job as an armorer, and she got into the industry because her father, Thell Reed, is basically a Hollywood legend as an armorer and weapons expert.
(seriously, you've probably seen a dozen movies he's been the armorer for: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0715715/ )
The dummy rounds used in The Crow had no powder, but the primer hadn't been removed. The primer being hit from an earlier scene or rehearsal generated enough pressure to separate the bullet from the casing, and it was just sitting in the barrel when they fired the blank that was being used for the scene.
Like I said the first time this topic came around, there's honestly no reason to be using real, functioning weapons for movie making these days. Dude may not be a likeable person, but he didn't enter into this planning to murder people thanks to others failing in their responsibility.
To be clear, the DA is saying that the actor (Baldwin) had an additional responsibility to ensure the gun did not have live ammunition in it. This isn't about his role as a producer whatsoever.
Yeah, and I don't buy that. The armorer is more responsible and if they are charging Baldwin they should also be charging them since they were their bullets under their purview and responsibility. When you hire someone from a pedigree of weapons work. You don't expect to have to check their work mid shoot. There should have never been any real bullets on set.
We are talking about putting the guy in jail over this. I don't think Douchey Baldwin earned jail time.
I'm not at all familiar with gun laws. Is it standard practice for the person handling the weapon when discharged to be responsible for it in all circumstances regardless of any assurances they've been given that it's not capable of doing typical gun things?
They already got the AD who announced "Cold Gun" (without checking) to plead guilty and are charging the armorer who loaded the real bullet, I'd be surprised if they can make this stick on Baldwin.
If you are told a gun is empty (which is what he was told) and you pull the trigger without checking, yes you are responsible. That's completely different from an armorer saying, gun is loaded with blanks and is ready on the set to be fired for the scene.
So yes, to answer your question, if he checked and saw the gun was loaded, not only should he have unloaded it, he should have then fired the armorer. Even at close range, as Alec was to the victim, blanks can be lethal.
Any other attorneys here want to step up and explain how if you accidentally shoot a person you are probably going to be charged with involuntary manslaughter?
Baldwin can likely beat the charge but it's the right one to bring and they're right to bring it.
Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
ok well guns may not be my thing but lets say you and i go toe-to-toe on bird law and see who comes out the winner
involuntary manslaughter is lowkey the most embarrassing one at least have some conviction in your killing